“There’s no such thing as a free lunch”
Charity should surely mean giving to those less fortunate; for example in education, poverty, health, housing etc. It seems a Charitable Cause can be almost anything.Over the years, several governments have made changes to our Charities, for example the Charities Act 2006. Under the then Labour Government of Tony Blair, significant changes to the actual definitions of what constitutes a charitable cause were made. (1)
Industry & Parliament Trust
The objects of this Trust are to promote knowledge of the function of industry based in United Kingdom and its part in the life of the United Kingdom among those concerned with all aspects of the Government of the United Kingdom and the European Economic Community. To promote knowledge of all aspects of the U. K. Government and European Economic Community among those concerned with the management of industry and industrial decision making.
Known as the IPT, it sponsors and provides ‘fellowships’, awards, courses of instruction, training programmes and projects calculated to provide Government and industry knowledge of each other’s functions.
Subscribing Members are wealth creators in big business and the trust members are from both Parliament and Business. Qualification is £6,000 initial payment to the Trust, based on their Incorporation Document, first implemented in 1977 then again updated in their Memorandum of Articles of Association dated 2006. There are two types of Membership – Subscribing Members and Trustee Members. (more information here)
In the accounts, year ending 2017, they state that the total income was £853,562 (more details here).
The question the People no doubt would have is how is this beneficial to the public? (one of the conditions of a Charity). How is this a Charity?
Recently, in the days of Brexit and agreeing a Trade Deal, many M.Ps have stated that they are of superior knowledge to that of the public in making decisions; no doubt they believe their ‘fellowship’ certificates entitle them to this statement.
What begs the more immediate questions are – why are Parliament accepting monetary payments from big business to such a membership when Parliament should naturally be open to all? What is the money actually being spent on? How does it actually benefit big business to have the knowledge of how Parliament works? How is this beneficial to the public?
Here are just some examples of their ‘Fellowships’
Is there not a ‘conflict of interest’? Would you not be obliged to ‘help’ with legislation towards the benefits of your ‘subscribing members’?
As they say, ‘there’s no such thing as a free lunch”.
(a)the prevention or relief of poverty;
(b)the advancement of education;
(c)the advancement of religion;
(d)the advancement of health or the saving of lives;
(e)the advancement of citizenship or community development;
(f)the advancement of the arts, culture, heritage or science;
(g)the advancement of amateur sport;
(h)the advancement of human rights, conflict resolution or reconciliation or the promotion of religious or racial harmony or equality and diversity;
(i)the advancement of environmental protection or improvement;
(j)the relief of those in need because of youth, age, ill-health, disability, financial hardship or other disadvantage;
(k)the advancement of animal welfare;
(l)the promotion of the efficiency of the armed forces of the Crown or of the efficiency of the police, fire and rescue services or ambulance services;
(m)any other purposes—